Luận văn ngôn ngữ anh a CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS OF KAMALA HARRIS’ IDEOLOGY IN HER SPEECH AT THE 2020 DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL CONVENTION

VIETNAM ACADEMY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES
GRADUATE ACADEMY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES

Nguyễn Thị Khánh Vân

A CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS OF
KAMALA HARRIS’ IDEOLOGY IN HER
SPEECH AT THE 2020 DEMOCRATIC
NATIONAL CONVENTION

MA THESIS IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE

HANOI, 2021


VIETNAM ACADEMY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES
GRADUATE ACADEMY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES

Nguyễn Thị Khánh Vân

A CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS OF
KAMALA HARRIS’ IDEOLOGY IN HER
SPEECH AT THE 2020 DEMOCRATIC
NATIONAL CONVENTION

Field: English Language
Code: 8220201
Supervisor: Nguyễn Thị Việt Nga, Ph.D.

HANOI, 2021

DECLARATION BY AUTHOR
I hereby state that this minor thesis entitled ‘A critical discourse analysis
of Kamala Harris’ ideology in her speech at the 2020 Democratic National
Convention’ is the result of my own research. This work is original and all the
sources that I have used or quoted have been indicated and acknowledged.
Moreover, I confirm that this M.A thesis has not been submitted or published
for any degree to any other universities or institutions.
Author’s Signature

Nguyễn Thị Khánh Vân

i


ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would love to acknowledge my advisor, Nguyễn Thị Việt Nga, PhD, for
her assistance in completing my thesis. I am deeply thankful for her patience
and the time she has spent on me.
Thanks to Prof. Võ Đại Quang introduced the whole new realm of
Critical Discourse Analysis to me.
I would also like to express my gratitude to Mr. Đặng Nguyên Giang,
PhD, and Department of Foreign Languages, Graduate Academy of Social
Sciences, the professors, teachers and staff for providing various
opportunities in developing myself.
I want to acknowledge my classmates for encouraging me and sharing
joy with me at difficult moments. Then I also want to thank my rector for
giving me a chance to improve my knowledge.
Last but not least, I would like to express my gratitude for my family, my
parents and my spouse. I would be the same without you. Thank you for

putting your faith in me and giving me this opportunity.

ii


TABLE OF CONTENTS
DECLARATION BY AUTHOR........................................................................i
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS................................................................................ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS.................................................................................iii
ABSTRACT.....................................................................................................vi
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS..........................................................................vii
LIST OF FIGURES.......................................................................................viii
LIST OF TABLES............................................................................................ix
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION..................................................................... 1
1.1. Rationale of the study............................................................................ 1
1.2. Aims of the Study...................................................................................2
1.3. Research Questions................................................................................2
1.4. Scope of the Study................................................................................. 3
1.5. Significance of the Study.......................................................................3
1.6. Methodology..........................................................................................4
1.6.1. Research approach.......................................................................... 4
1.6.2. Methods of the study.......................................................................5
1.6.3. Data collection and data analysis....................................................6
1.7. Structure of the Study............................................................................ 9
1.8. Summary................................................................................................9
CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW.........................................................10
2.1. Theoretical background........................................................................10
2.1.1. Discourse analysis.........................................................................10
2.1.2. The origin of Critical Discourse Analysis.....................................12
2.1.3. Critical Discourse Analysis...........................................................14

2.1.4. Ideology........................................................................................ 17
iii


2.1.5. The relations between CDA and Ideology....................................20
2.2. Central approaches to CDA on the ideology........................................23
2.2.1. Teun Van Dijk’s.............................................................................23
2.2.2. The Discourse-Historical Approach of Ruth Wodak.....................24
2.2.3. Norman Fairclough's approach..................................................... 25
2.2.4. Norman Fairclough's framework.................................................. 27
2.3. Review of previous studies..................................................................32
2.4. Chapter summary.................................................................................35
CHAPTER 3: IDEOLOGIES OF KAMALA IN THE SPEECH....................36
3.1. The background of the speech..............................................................36
3.2. Ideology of inspiration to women........................................................39
3.3. Ideology ties to condemning racism.................................................... 44
3.4. Ideology as a power of persuasion.......................................................45
3.5. Chapter summary.................................................................................50
CHAPTER 4. LINGUISTIC REALIZATION OF KAMALA’S IDEOLOGIES

IN THE SPEECH......................................................................51
4.1. Vocabulary............................................................................................51
4.1.1. Experiential values of words.........................................................51
4.1.2. Relational values of words............................................................57
4.1.3. Expressive values of words...........................................................58
4.1.4. Metaphor.......................................................................................58
4.2. Grammar.............................................................................................. 59
4.2.1. Experiential values of grammatical features.................................59
4.2.2. Relational values of grammatical features....................................60
4.2.3. Expressive values of grammatical features...................................63

4.2.4. Sentences linking.......................................................................... 64
4.2.5. Textual structures.......................................................................... 65
iv


4.3. Interpretation........................................................................................68
4.3.1. Situation context and discourse type.............................................68
4.3.2. Intertexual context and presupposition.........................................71
4.4. Explanation.......................................................................................... 73
4.5. Chapter summary.................................................................................75
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION........................................................................76
5.1. Recapitulation...................................................................................... 76
5.2. Concluding Remarks............................................................................78
5.3. Implications..........................................................................................79
5.4. Limitations and Suggestions for Further Studies.................................80
REFERENCES................................................................................................81
APPENDIX 1: Kamala Harris’ Speech at the 2020 DNC.................................I
APPENDIX 2: Types of Sentence Structures.................................................IX

v


ABSTRACT
This study attempts to discover the ideologies and how those ideologies
are realized linguistically in the speech delivered by the elected vice president
Kamala Harris at the 2020 Democratic National Convention using the CDA
framework suggested by Norman Fairclough (2013). The study targets to
learn more about the relationships between discourse and ideology to promote
the awareness of CDA in an appropriate way in social studies. Moreover, the
study intended to contribute to the development of English language

education, particularly in studying CDA by giving some suggestions for
learners. The objectives are to investigate Kamala’s ideologies embedded in
her speech and analyze how ideas are represented in the speech using
linguistics components. The findings show that the ideologies embedded in
the selected speech are the ideology of inspiration to women, the ideology of
racist condemnation, and the ideology as a power of persuasion. Research
shows that Harris' ideas are expressed through vocabulary strategies, flexible
use of personal pronouns 'we', 'I' and 'you', and the use of voice. According to
the results, Harris deft purpose is to introduce herself, inspire women and
show her support to Joe Biden. Additionally, she denounced the Trump racist
administration.

vi


LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
CDA: Critical Discourse Analysis
CL:

Critical Linguistics

DA:

Discourse Analysis

DHA: Discourse-Historical Approach
DNC: Democratic National Convention
US:

United States

vii


LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURES
Figure 2.1: Levels of theories and linguistic analysis ……………………

25

Figure 2.2: Interpretation…………………………………………………

30

Figure 2.3: Explanation ………………………………… ………………

31

viii


LIST OF TABLES

Table 3.1: Occurrences of lexical items……………………………….….

43

Table 4.1: Lexical items for ‘in-groups’ and positive terms on women….
Table 4.2: Lexical items for ‘out-groups’ and negative terms……………

52
53

Table 4.3: Lexical items for ‘in-groups’ on Joe Biden…………………...

54

Table 4.4: Number of passive and active sentences……………………...

59

Table 4.5: Summary of modes of the sentences………………….………

60

Table 4.6: Frequency of personal pronouns………………………………

62

Table 4.7: Summary of modal auxiliaries………………………………...

63

Table 4.8: List of informal lexical items………………………………….

70

ix

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. Rationale of the study
There is no doubt that language is one of the most noteworthy inventions
that people have ever made which is used as a means of communication, the
foremost viable way to precise the wills, sentiments, and states of mind toward
the world. It obviously becomes a social phenomenon, and it has been taken
advantage of by many specialists from various fields, includes politics.
Language is supposed to be the most powerful tool for politicians to realize
their goals. Generally, power and ideology are always enclosed in their
discourses once uttered. Speeches have implications, so sometimes listeners
struggle to grasp the meaning behind words. The quest for gaining a profound
understanding of the meaning behind some speeches, both written and spoken,
is the mission of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA). The CDA provides an
honest framework to capture the connotation of the spoken and written
language.
According to Fairclough (2012), ‘critical discourse analysis (CDA) brings
the critical tradition of social analysis into language studies and contributes to
critical social analysis a particular focus on discourse and relations between
discourse and other social elements (power relations, ideologies, institutions,
social identities, and so forth). Critical social analysis can be understood as
normative and explanatory critique.’ (p.9)
Despite the Covid-19 pandemic, the U.S. presidential elections in 2020
were processed as planned. Former Democrat candidate Joe Biden and Sen.
Kamala Harris defeated the Republican coalition of the current president,
Donald Trump, and the vice-presidents - Mike Pence. On August 11, 2020,
Senator Kamala Harris gave her victory speech by paying tribute to the
1


national women and history, who made this moment possible and gave hope to

many people. Kamala Harris became the first woman, and the first black and
Asian American, to be the vice president-elect of the United States.
For all these reasons, I have decided to choose the CDA as the area of my
study and to take ‘A critical discourse analysis of Kamala Harris’ ideology in
her speech at the 2020 Democratic National Convention’ for my MA thesis,
using Norman Fairclough's views as the theoretical framework.
1.2. Aims of the Study
The study targets to learn more about the relationships between discourse
and ideology to promote the awareness of CDA in an appropriate way in social
studies. Moreover, the study intended to contribute to the development of
English language education, particularly in studying CDA by giving some
suggestions for learners.
To achieve the above aims, the objectives are specified to:
- Investigate Kamala Harris' ideologies embedded in her speech at 2020
Democratic National Convention.
- Analyze how ideas are represented in the speech using linguistics
components.
1.3. Research Questions
To fulfill the aim and the objective of the investigation, the researcher is
going to answer the following questions:
- What ideologies are conveyed by Kamala in her speech at 2020
Democratic National Convention?
- How are those ideologies realized linguistically?

2


1.4. Scope of the Study
In this paper, I choose to analyze only Kamala Harris' speech during the
third night of the Democratic National Convention (DNC), where she officially

accepted the nomination as the Democratic vice presidential nominee.
I focus primarily on the transcription of the speech. Hence, we do not
include the spoken version, such as non-linguistic features: gestures, stress, so
forth. The thesis is a linguistic and not a political study, which means that we
do not explore all the information surrounding politics.
The thesis only tries to identify first the use of language and, above all,
explain its ideology in the speech. Moreover, this is a CDA investigation, and
‘critical’ could be understood here as ‘having a distance from the data... and
focusing on self-reflection as scholars doing research’ (Wodak, 2002, p.9).
I will analyze the speech from a social standpoint. Because the main
themes of the discourse related to international social matters. As mentioned
above, the main objective of this study is always linguistics, not a sociopolitical issue.
1.5. Significance of the Study
Theoretically, this study reinforces CDA theories, particularly in terms of
political discourse. CDA analysts can uncover ideology hidden behind words
by examining texts objectively.
Practically, the study also provides insights for those interested in
discourse analysis in general and political discourse analysis in particular.
Moreover, as previously said, this research aims to find some practical
applications of CDA in English teaching and language education in general.
The author hopes it will be highly beneficial in teaching and learning English,

3


especially the translation aspect. It also aids the reader in understanding the
coded message in political speeches.
Political and social-matter-related discourses are considered to be the
targets of CDA. Plenty of speeches on these issues by George Bush, Barack
Obama, Hillary Clinton, etc., have been critically analyzed. However, there is

no CDA of speeches delivered by Kamala Harris, the first colour woman in
history who becomes vice-president-elect of the USA.
Besides, she inspired women and pointed out the failure of the Trump
administration, she also called for solidarity and stressed the need to elect Joe
Biden as the 46th President of the United States in her speech. Therefore, the
thesis hopes to discover and demonstrate how effective language is used to
transfer ideas that affect people's perceptions.
1.6. Methodology
1.6.1. Research approach
The Critical Discourse Analytical framework, introduced by Fairclough
(2001), is used in this paper. The three stages include description,
interpretation, and explanation will be employed. Yet, it is worth noting that
this study does not address all of Fairclough's questions. Only the most notable
features of the speech are highlighted to clarify the declaration of ideology.
This decision is based on CDA's, concern about the social context, that is
used. Texts are viewed as products of a socially or politically certain context.
Language elements can be chosen at random or for the luxury of different
options, but they can also be chosen to reflect the world in a way that is biased
toward one's point of view or ideology. The analysis of a text is beyond the
scope of textual analysis because it requires researching the processes of text

4


production, interpretation, and explanation on the social and cognitive
conditions that give them meaning.
In the first stage, a natural textual description of the speech, in terms of
lexis and syntax, will be done to find out the ideologies in Kamala Harris’
utterance.
In the second stage, questions relating to the situational context will be

explored to define the ideologies embedded in the speech.
Finally, in the third stage, the text is interpreted as part of the social
process.
The author is well aware of the subjectivity of this framework when
selecting to use it. As the term 'critical' implies, doing CDA entails having a
political stance when analyzing facts, which inevitably leads to personal
judgments. ‘Unlike much other scholarship, CDA does not deny but explicitly
defìnes and defends its own socio-political position. That is, CDA is biased and proud of it’ (van Dijk, 2003, p.96).
To preserve imparality, parallel the author's analysis, we also use linguists'
perspectives and views on the problem. Furthermore, to access objective
outcomes, both qualitative and quantitative data processing approaches are
applied.
1.6.2. Methods of the study
The primary method employed in this study is descriptive, a qualitative
content analysis method which, as Hsieh and Shannon (2005) claim, is a
research method for subjective interpretation of the context of the text data
through the systematic classification process of coding and identifying
patterns. This method is more than simply counting words or extracting
objective content from texts to examine meanings, structures that may be

5


manifest or latent in a particular text. It allows researchers to understand social
reality in a subjective but scientific manner.
It is impossible to clarify which ideology is used in every single sentence.
When analyzing the vocabulary of the speech, an indication of an utterance
being influenced by a certain ideology can be found. To identify the ideology
underlying Kamala's speech we rely on the in-group-outgroup distinctions and
differences. Typical of such distinction is ingroup favouring and outgroup

disparagement, positive self-presentation and the involvement of our group
with all good things and their group with all bad things.
The three-stage practical framework of CDA given by Fairclough (2013)
will be employed. The three stages include description, interpretation, and
explanation. However, it is notable that not all the questions suggested by
Fairclough are covered in this study. Only the outstanding features of the
speech are focused on in order to enlighten the assertion of ideology.
Initially, in the first stage named description, the speech’s lexicalization,
grammar, and macro-structure are placed under analysis. For vocabulary, the
in-group positive and out-group negative lexicalizations are examined.
Besides, the lexical choice regarding formality is inspected. In terms of
grammar, the use of voice, personal pronouns are the main focus of an
investigation. The macro-structure of the text is also analyzed in this stage.
In the next phase, questions relating to the situational context will be
discussed to make lucid the ideologies embedded in the text. Finally, in the last
step, explanation, the text is portrayed as part of social process, part of social
practice for analysis at both situational and societal levels.
1.6.3. Data collection and data analysis
The study is attached to the CDA approach and carried out with the
following stages:
6


In the first stage, the whole course of the research conducts a literature
review to gain and present an understanding of the issues relevant to the
research topic. A host of reference books, materials, studies, and articles
related to the field of CDA and the theme of the thesis will be collected, read,
classified, and interpreted.
In the second stage, we will select the needed information from Harris
speech at the 2020 Democratic National Convention. These data are

thoroughly analysed by appropriate tools.
In the last stage, we will have a careful analysis is to unveil the embedded
ideology and cover the hidden meanings intended in the speech.
The method in this study is the Quantitative method which stresses more
on the collection and analysis of numerical data and statistics. The study uses
utterances in Kamala’s speech on night three at the 2020 DNC as the data
source, thus counting and measuring are commonly used. The research
findings are presented in tables and charts or figures.
The CDA is the main approach to this study, which primarily uses
Fairclough's analytical framework. This framework consists of three stages of
discourse analysis: description, interrelation, and explanation. This frame is
described in detail below.
About the CDA, three stages are taken into consideration.
First, the description stage (textual analysis) examines the fundamental
formal properties of the discourse: vocabulary (word choice, word meaning,
wording, metaphor), grammar (the voice, the modes, personal pronouns and
sentence linking) and textual structure (interactional convention and large scale
structure).
Second, the interpretation stage views the discourse as a result of a
process of production (situation context) and also as a resource in the act of
7


interpretation (intertextual context and presupposition).
Finally, the explanation stage, most vital, attempts to find the
relationship between interaction and the social context.
Quantitative and qualitative methods are also employed through three
stages, with the dominance of the latter.
Quantitative Research
The quantitative method is used to analyze linguistic features (vocabulary,

processes, etc.) to find the most frequent and remarkable words - key words in
each corpus and to find the most frequent collocates of the keywords.
Qualitative Research
The qualitative method is used to choose keywords and collocates for
analysis. In the critical investigation of the sentences where the keywords and
the collocates figure.
The study data are collected on
/>To understand more about her speech, there will be an overview in the
next part.
In conclusion, the speech will be analyzed in detail, by using the threestage practical framework of CDA given by Fairclough (2013). However, only
the outstanding features of the speech are focused on enlightening the assertion
of ideology. After that, the research data introduces the origin and context of
speech. The whole discourse is divided into lines and then numbered for
analysis. Finally, the study procedure describes the sequence of steps to
research.

8


1.7. Structure of the Study
This paper consists of:
Chapter 1: Introduction: This part contains the rationale, aims, scope,
significance, methodology and structure of the study. We present the approach
and the method of the study. And we also show the data and the procedure of
the research.
Chapter 2: The literature review consists of 2 sections
- Section 1: Theoretical background gives an overview of discourse, the
origin of critical discourse analysis, critical discourse analysis, ideology, the
relations between language and ideology.
- Section 2: is the central approach to CDA on the ideology from the view

of Teun van Dijk, Ruth Wodak and Norman Fairclough; This section also
introduces Fairclough's framework.
Chapter 3: presents ideologies of Kamala in the speech at the 2020 DNC
Chapter 4: Linguistic realization of Kamala’s ideologies in the speech:
This chapter consists of the analysis of the address in three stages: description,
interpretation and explanation.
Chapter 5: Conclusion. This part summarises the results of the study,
presents conclusions and implications. It also indicates some limitations and
offers some suggestions for further research.
1.8. Summary
The targets of this section, firstly, affirm the research questions and
secondly, we also use prestigious scholars' perspectives and views on the
problem. Furthermore, to access objective outcomes, both qualitative and
quantitative data processing approaches are applied.

9


CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1. Theoretical background
2.1.1. Discourse analysis
Discourse analysis (DA) is concerned with the study of the relationship
between language and the contexts in which it is used. In other words,
discourse analysis studies language in use: written texts of all kinds, and
spoken language.
Harris (1952) was interested in the distribution of linguistic elements in
extended texts and the links between the texts and their social situation.
Though, his paper is quite distinct from the discourse analysis that we are used
to nowadays.
The eminent linguists such as Austin (1962), Searle (1969), and Grice

(1975) also have influenced the study of language as social action, along with
the development of pragmatics, which studies the meaning of language in
context (see Levinson 1983; Leech 1983).
British discourse analysis was greatly influenced by Halliday’s functional
approach of language (e.g. Halliday, 1973), whose framework emphasizes the
social function of language and the thematic and informational structure of
speech and writing. The British work has principally followed structural
linguistics criteria, on the basis of the isolation of units, and sets of rules
defining well-formed sequences of discourse.
American discourse analysis has been dominated by work within the
ethnomethodological tradition, which emphasizes the research method of close
observation of a group of people communicating in natural settings. The
general heading of discourse analysis includes conversation analysis from the
American traditional view. In the conversational analysis, the emphasis is not
10


upon building structural models but on the close observation of the behavior of
participants in talk and on patterns that recur over a wide range of natural data.
The findings of Goffman (1976,1979), and Sacks, Schegloff, and Jefferson
(1974) are imperative in the study of conversational norms, turn-taking, and
other features of spoken interaction.
Dijk (1972), Beaugrande (1980), Halliday and Hasan (1976) are linguists
who have made great impacts in findings of identifying the relationship
between language elements.
DA has grown into a wide-ranging and heterogeneous discipline that finds
its unity in the description of language above the sentence and an interest in the
contexts and cultural influences that affect language in use.
Fairclough and Wodak (1997) state that texts are the only evidence for the
existence of discourses, one kind of concrete realization of abstract forms of

knowledge; at the same tune, they are interactive and influenced by
sociolinguistic factors.
Moreover, Jager and Maier (2009), quoted in Wodak & Meyer (2009)
noted that discourse is the manifestation of ideologies; hence, forms individual
and collective awareness that impacts people's actions. Through the repetition
of ideas and statements, discourse solidifies knowledge and reflects shapes and
enables social reality. Moreover, discourse can be defined by the activities
participants engage in, and the power enacted and reproduced through them.
In Fairclough's view (2001) language and society have an internal and
dialectical relationship. Language phenomena are social phenomena of a
special sort in the sense that people communicate in ways that are determined
socially, even when people are most conscious of their individuality. On the
other hand, social phenomena are linguistic in the sense that language activity

11


that goes on in social contexts is not merely a reflection or expression of social
processes and practices but also a part of those processes and practices.
When regarding language as social practice or a social process,
Fairclough (2001) uses the term ‘discourse’ to the whole process of social
interaction of which a text is just a part. This process includes the process of
production and the process of interpretation.
As a result, discourse can affect parts of society as well as be conditioned
by parts of society and obviously a sort of social practice. Therefore, seeing
language as discourse and as social practice, one does not only analyze texts or
processes of production and interpretation, but also analyze the relationship
between texts, processes, and their social conditions, both the immediate
conditions of the social context and the more remote conditions of institutional
and social structures. We will discuss deeply this in the next part - Critical

Discourse Analysis.
2.1.2. The origin of Critical Discourse Analysis
Critical Linguistics (CL) originated in the mid-1970s as a requirement for
an academic linguistic branch that would explore the relationship between
language and ideology, social structure. It is supposed that the need for
linguistics is ‘critical’, which fully reflects the hidden cause of the phenomena
it studies and the nature of the language. CL is believed to be capable of
uncovering implications in language and suggests some significant tools for a
do-it-yourself analysis of language and ideology.
CL was theoretically influenced by the Western-Marxist philosophy,
Critical Theory. The pioneers of CL were Roger Fowler and Gunther Kress.
They argued that ‘the world-view comes to language-users from their relation
to institutions and the socio-economic structure of their society. It is facilitated
and confined for them by a language use which has society’s ideological
12


impress. Similarly, ideology is linguistically mediated and habitual for an
acquiescent, uncritical reader who has already been socialized into sensitivity
to the significance of patterns of language.’ (p.185)
The framework which CL based on was Systemic Functional Linguistics
of Halliday. The concepts which were given in his books Language as Social
Semiotic (1978), and Functional Grammar (1985) became imperative for
understanding grammar and interpreting texts.
In the early 1990s, Teun van Dijk, Norman Fairclough, Gunther Kress,
Theo van Leeuwen, and Ruth Wodak were the first scholars with distinctly
different approaches: theories and methodologies, congregated and made
significant changes but maintained relevance in many features. Theories and
methodologies in Discourse Analysis were peculiar, but the similarity was
approach principles and the common interests in explicating ideologies and

power through the organized investigation of semiotical information (written,
spoken, or visual). Since then, the term CDA has been used to denote CL.
Fairclough (2013, pp.10-11) suggested that CDA must have all the
following characteristics:
1. It is not just analysis of discourse (or more concretely texts), it is part
of some form of systematic transdisciplinary analysis of relations
between discourse and other elements of the social process.
2. It is not just general commentary on discourse, it includes some form
of systematic analysis of texts.
3. It is not just descriptive it is also normative. It addresses social wrongs
in their discursive aspects and possible ways of righting or mitigating
them.
In conclusion, CDA is a progression from CL but CDA analysts take
outstanding advance: ‘CDA sees itself not as a dispassionate and objective
13


social science, but as engaged and committed; it is a form of intervention in
social practice and social relationships’ (Fairclough & Wodak, 1997, p. 258).
More specifically, CDA is to reveal the ideological assumptions hidden in the
structures of language.
2.1.3. Critical Discourse Analysis
Each CDA researcher has his own way to define what CDA means.
However, they all agreed that CDA as a branch of linguistic targets ‘to
systematically explore the often opaque relationship of causality and
determination between discursive practices, events, texts, and wider social and
cultural structures, relations, and processes; to investigate how such practices,
events, and texts arise out of and are ideologically shaped by the relation of
power and struggles overpower’ (Fairclough, 1995, p.132).
CDA is a growing research movement composed of multiple distinct

theoretical and methodological approaches to the study of language, in other
words, CDA has no unitary theory or set of methods. Furthermore, CDA
focuses on discourse and on relations between language and other social
elements, such as power relations, ideologies, institutions, social identities, and
so forth. Dijk (2011) states that ‘we might best see CDA as a problem-oriented
interdisciplinary research movement, subsuming a variety of approaches, each
with different theoretical models, research methods, and agendas.’ (p. 357)
According to Wodak & Meyer (2009), CDA is a qualitative analytical
approach for critically describing, interpreting, and explaining the ways in
which discourses construct, maintain, and legitimize social inequalities.
Moreover, CDA is considered as part of critical social analysis. While
social analysis focuses on describing existing realities and explaining the
existence of that realities. This is necessary but not enough to change the
realities of society for the better. Critical discourse analysis, on the other hand,
14